Background and Objectives:The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of laparoscopic surgery performed for coexisting spleen and gallbladder surgical diseases.Methods:Between May 2004 and October 2012, 12 patients underwent concomitant laparoscopic splenectomy and cholecystectomy. Indications for surgery included idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura in 5 patients, hereditary spherocytosis in 4 patients, and thalassemia intermedia in 3 patients.Results:The mean operative time was 100 minutes (range, 80–160 minutes), and the blood loss ranged from 0 to 150 mL (mean, 50 mL). The mean longitudinal diameter of the spleen was 14 cm. One patient required conversion to open procedure. An accessory spleen was detected and removed in one case. The mean length of hospital stay was 5 days. No deaths or other major intraoperative and/or postoperative complications occurred.Conclusion:Provided that the technique is performed by an experienced surgical team, concomitant laparoscopic splenectomy and cholecystectomy is a safe and feasible procedure and may be considered for coexisting spleen and gallbladder diseases.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to assess whether contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) shows a false negative rate close to zero and therefore is suitable as the main non-invasive follow-up strategy for long-term monitoring after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). Methods: We included all consecutive patients who underwent CEUS as follow-up after EVAR at our center between January 2017 and December 2021.The follow-up protocol consisted of Duplex ultrasound (DUS) with CEUS at 1, 3, 6 months postoperatively and every 6 months thereafter. Results: A total of 125 patients underwent 228 CEUS. The aneurysm sac showed shrinkage in 80 (64%) patients, stability in 32 (25.6%), and enlargement in 13 (10.4%). A total of 29 (23.2%) patients showed type 2 endoleak, 6 (4.8%) patients showed type 1 endoleak and 3 (2.4%) patients showed type 3 endoleak. Thirteen patients underwent one or more reinterventions. The sensitivity of CEUS vs. DUS was 100% vs. 75% (p > 0.0001). In classifying type 2 endoleak, CEUS compared to DUS showed a sensitivity of 93.2% vs. 59.4% and a specificity of 99.3% vs. 99.3%. CEUS showed a higher sensitivity compared to DUS in the detection of type 2 endoleak. CEUS permits the identification of a subset of patients requiring a stricter follow-up protocol.

No abstract